[00:00:03]
ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GONNA GET GOING.
I WILL SAY THIS IS GONNA BE THE ONE MAN KEITH BAND SHOW, SO I'LL BE HERE ALL NIGHT.
UM, WE GONNA, IT'S GONNA GO GREAT.
WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO GO, WE'RE GONNA GET GOING.
UM, I SEE CONVERSATIONS WRAPPING UP AND FOLKS ARE GETTING SET UP AND READY TO GO.
UH, TO BE HONEST, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THIS IS GONNA GO, UM, BUT IT'LL GO AS LONG AS IT NEEDS TO BE.
ALRIGHT, SO WE GOT A COUPLE THINGS WE DO NEED TO COVER AS WE GET STARTED HERE.
THE FIRST THING WE'RE GONNA DO IS, UH, OUR AGENDA AND THAT YOU SHOULD BE SEEING ON THE SCREEN.
WE'LL, WE'LL START WITH THE ANTITRUST.
UM, UH, WE'LL DISCUSS THE PURPOSE.
THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS, UH, COMMENTED ON AT LENGTH AT THE, AT THE JANUARY DISCUSSION.
UH, WE'VE GOT SOME, SOME UPDATES BASED ON SOME FEEDBACK, UH, THAT WE, WE RECEIVED SOME WRITTEN FEEDBACK, SOME DISCUSSION.
UH, MEASUREMENT WAS AN ITEM THAT CAME UP, SO WE'LL DISCUSS THAT A LITTLE BIT.
UH, THERE WAS SOME, UH, REQUEST TO SHOW SOME, SOME EXAMPLES.
SO WE DO HAVE, UH, A FEW OF THOSE.
SO HOPEFULLY YOU HAD A CHANCE TO THINK ABOUT THOSE.
AND ACTUALLY, I THINK SOME OF THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD TODAY, UH, SORT OF, UH, HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE USE OF, OF THE FRAMEWORK IN ACTION.
UM, AND SO I'LL SORT OF HIGHLIGHT THAT WHEN WE GET TO IT.
I, I THINK IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR FOLKS THAT ARE HERE, ASK SOME QUESTIONS, GATHER SOME FEEDBACK, AND THEN NEXT STEPS, UH, AND, AND WHERE WE'RE GOING AND, AND, AND WHATNOT.
SO, UH, ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
UH, I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE TAGS ANYMORE, SO I GUESS, I GUESS WE'LL HAVE TO SORT OF RAISE HANDS.
SO WE'LL MOVE TO THE ANTITRUST.
[1. Antitrust Admonition]
ALL RIGHT.SO OUR ANTITRUST ADMONITION TO AVOID RAISING CONCERNS ABOUT ANTITRUST LIABILITY PARTICIPANTS IN ERCOT ACTIVITIES SHOULD REFRAIN FROM PROPOSING ANY ACTION OR MEASURES THAT WOULD EXCEED ERCO T'S AUTHORITY UNDER FEDERAL OR STATE LAW.
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION STAKEHOLDERS CONSULT, UH, THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT, UH, WHICH IS POSTED ON THE ERCO WEBSITE.
WE'RE GONNA PULL UP THE PRESENTATION.
THERE IS AN APPENDIX, UH, THAT WE NEED TO REFERENCE IF NECESSARY.
[2. Discuss purpose of ERCOT’s Proposed Market Design Framework]
UH, BUT WE'LL GET GOING HERE.SO THIS IS OUR, OUR FRAMEWORK.
IT DOES SAY TAC, BUT IT'S, IT'S TO THE TAC, NOT IN THE TAC.
SO WHAT ARE OUR GOALS? AND, AND ULTIMATELY OUR GOALS ARE, UH, THE AGENDA THAT WE DID HIGHLIGHT JUST A FEW MOMENTS AGO.
AND, AND, UM, IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, WE'LL, WE'LL GO THROUGH THAT.
BUT, UM, HERE'S, HERE'S OUR AGENDA FOR TODAY.
ALRIGHT, SO LET'S START WITH PURPOSE.
THIS, THIS CAME UP IN A LOT OF THE DIALOGUE THAT WE HAD.
SOME OF THE COMMENTS, THE WRITTEN COMMENTS SAID, WELL, WHAT, WHAT REALLY IS THE PURPOSE? LET'S, LET'S TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT IS.
AND SO, SO I REALLY TRIED TO HIGHLIGHT, UH, FROM, FROM OUR VIEW, WHAT IS THE PRIMARY PURPOSE? AND IN OUR VIEW, THE PRIMARY PURPOSE IS, IS TO, IS TO HELP OUR DECISION MAKERS, UM, INCLUDING OUR
UM, AND BETTER GET A SENSE OF HOW IT FITS WITHIN THE OVERALL MARKET DESIGN.
I THINK, I THINK WE DO, UH, ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT DID COME OUT WAS, HEY, WE DO A GOOD JOB IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS OF TALKING ABOUT A LOT OF THIS STUFF.
BUT, BUT WHEN COMMUNICATING THAT TO, UH, SOME OF THESE DECISION MAKERS, IT, IT DOESN'T, IT'S NOT ALWAYS CLEAR WHAT, WHAT TOOL DOES WHAT.
UH, AND, AND THAT'S REALLY THE ANALOGY I LIKE TO USE HERE IS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE GOT DIFFERENT TOOLS IN OUR TOOL BELT OF MARKET DESIGN AND, AND HELPING THEM UNDERSTAND, USING, USING SOME COMMON LANGUAGE IN, IN TERMS OF A FRAMEWORK ON HOW THAT, THAT WORKS.
AND AS EVEN THE PICTURE SHOWS, WE'VE GOT A SHOVEL, WE'VE GOT A RAKE, WE'VE GOT A, WE'VE GOT A PITCHFORK.
UM, AND SO WHAT DOES IT DO? WHAT IS IT USEFUL FOR? AND I THINK INTUITIVELY WE, WE KNOW WHAT ALL THOSE TOOLS ARE USED FOR.
AND I THINK INTUITIVELY IN A STAKEHOLDER PROCESS WHEN YOU'RE, WHEN YOU'RE IN ATTACK MEETING A WMS MEETING, DAY IN AND DAY, DAY OUT, UM, I THINK, I THINK WE DEFINITELY GET A BIT, A BETTER APPRECIATION FOR WHAT ALL THOSE TOOLS DO AND, AND WHAT THEY MEAN.
BUT I THINK, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE HARDER FOR THESE DECISION MAKERS TO, THAT AREN'T NECESSARILY DAY IN, DAY
[00:05:01]
OUT THINKING ABOUT, UM, WHAT SOME OF THESE TOOLS ARE.AND, AND, AND THE LANGUAGE THAT WE USE HERE IS, IS QUITE UNIQUE.
AND HAVING HAD A CHANCE TO, TO SPEAK IN DIFFERENT PLACES, THERE'S, IT'S A DIFFERENT DIALECT EVEN SO, UM, UH, IT, IT, IT CAN BE LOST ON, ON SOME FOLKS IF, IF THEY'RE NOT NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT.
AND, AND AS MUCH AS WE TRY TO MAKE THAT, UH, AS ACCESSIBLE AS POSSIBLE, AND, AND I KNOW RICHARD SORT OF, HEY, YOU KNOW, ACRONYMS, I THINK, UM, YEAH, WE, WE, WE'D LIKE NOT TO, BUT, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, UM, WE HAVE TO SPEAK IN WAYS AND, AND DO THINGS THAT MAY MAKE IT HARD FOR SOME FOLKS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT SOME OF THESE THINGS ARE.
SO THE FRAMEWORK IS, IS, IS PRIMARILY TO HELP THOSE DECISION MAKERS UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE TOOLS ARE, WHAT'S THE USE OF THOSE TOOLS AND, AND HOW CAN WE DEPLOY THEM IN, IN DIFFERENT WAYS IN, IN WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER A MARKET DESIGN.
AND, AND IN THE EXAMPLES WE'LL SEE LATER THAT YEAH, THERE'S CERTAIN INITIATIVES ARE REALLY GOOD AT DOING CERTAIN THINGS, BUT THEY'RE ALSO NOT AS GOOD POTENTIALLY AT DOING OTHER THINGS.
AND, AND WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? UM, ALRIGHT, AS A, AS A SECONDARY PURPOSE, UH, I, I THINK, AND THIS AGAIN CAME OUT IN SOME OF THE COMMENTS AS WELL, WELL, HOW CAN WE USE IT IN A STAKEHOLDER PROCESS AS AN EFFECTIVE WAY? AND, UM, ESSENTIALLY TO AID DISCUSSION, COMMUNICATION, AND, AND PARTICULARLY WITH PRIORITIZATION.
AND, AND I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT DOES COME UP, UH, FROM TIME TO TIME, AND WE HEARD IT A LITTLE BIT TODAY IN, IN, IN MY COMMENTS WHERE, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S, WHAT'S USEFUL IS, IS TO TRY TO HELP PRIORITIZE WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON BECAUSE WE DO END UP IN PERIODS OF, HEY, WE'VE GOT SCARCE RESOURCES.
UM, THERE, THERE ARE OBVIOUSLY SOME THINGS THAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, EITHER LEGISLATIVELY OR REGULATORY MANDATED.
UM, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WE HAVE SOME DISCRETION, WELL, WHAT ARE WE GONNA PRIORITIZE AND HOW DO WE DO THAT? AND, AND MY SENSE IS THAT IF WE'VE GOT SOMETHING THAT, THAT, THAT A FRAMEWORK CAN HELP US, UM, PROVIDE THAT AND, AND EVALUATE HOW WE CONSIDER SOME OF THESE INITIATIVES.
AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE ALREADY THINKING ABOUT SOME OF THESE AS, AS THEY COME THROUGH THE PROCESS.
AND I KNOW IN TALKING WITH SOME FOLKS IN TERMS OF, WELL MAKE YOUR CASE, WHY IS THIS RELEVANT? AND, UM, IT SEEMS LIKE THE FRAMEWORK COULD BE A USEFUL WAY TO HELP SHOW THAT, YEAH, THIS, THIS IS RELEVANT TO THE PROCESS AND IF WE DO HAVE DISCRETIONARY, UM, UH, BANDWIDTH, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE UTILIZE THAT DISCRETIONARY BANDWIDTH? UH, AND SO THE FINAL POINT IS ALSO, WELL, WHAT, WHAT THE FRAMEWORK ISN'T RIGHT.
AND I THINK IT'S, IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT IT IS, IT'S NOT A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF EVERYTHING THAT, UM, AND ALL FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE A, A MARKET DESIGN.
UM, IT'S, IT'S NOT SETTING A RELIABILITY STANDARD.
IT'S NOT SUPERSEDING AUTHORITY, UM, THAT EXISTS IN, IN THE LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY BODIES.
THAT'S, THAT'S NOT OUR INTENT HERE.
OUR INTENT IS, IS ULTIMATELY WORK WITHIN THAT AND, UH, ULTIMATELY PROVIDE, UM, UH, NOT SUPERSEDE THAT AND, AND TO NOT TRY TO BE EVERY, EVERY POTENTIAL OPTION, UM, EVERY POTENTIAL ELEMENT OR ATTRIBUTE, BUT, BUT IN, IN SOME WAYS WE, WE CAN SEE THEM AS CATCHALLS.
AND, AND WE'LL SEE THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT SOME OF THE ATTRIBUTES IS THAT IT COVERS A, A, A RANGE OF DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT ITEMS THAT, THAT WE MAY COVER.
I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE TENT CARDS.
THEY STOLE THEM, BUT, UM, SEE IF THE QUESTIONS LOOKS LIKE WE GOT BILL BARNES.
KEITH, ON THE, THE FRAMEWORK IS NOT SETTING A RELIABILITY STANDARD.
I, I WOULD COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU THAT THIS, THE GOAL OF THIS PROCESS SHOULDN'T BE TO CONTRADICT OR REPLACE, UM, THE STANDARDS AND GOALS THAT OUR REGULATORS HAVE SET FOR US.
BUT I DO THINK, YOU KNOW, THE ADOPTION OF A RELIABILITY STANDARD BY THE COMMISSION IS A VERY IMPORTANT EVOLUTION OF OUR MARKET.
UM, AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THIS FRAMEWORK WOULD LEVERAGE THAT RELIABILITY STANDARD IN SOME WAY AND, AND COMPARE THE TOOLS, UH, AND, AND WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING WITH WHAT THE STANDARD IS.
THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF HANDLING THE STANDARD.
SO I, I HOPE THAT, THAT THAT'S ONE OF THE, THE VISIONS THAT, UH, ERCOT HAS FOR THIS PROCESS.
AND, AND WE DO HAVE A SUBSEQUENT SLIDE THAT WE TOUCH, WE TOUCH ON, YOU KNOW, HOW WE COULD INCORPORATE THE STANDARD AND CONNECT IT WITH, WITH THE FRAMEWORK WE WE'RE USING HERE.
I WAS, I MISSED THE, I THINK IT WAS THE JANUARY MEETING.
UM, AND SO SAID ANOTHER WAY IS THIS, TO TAKE THE PROCESSES WE DO, UM, WITH THE PRIORITIZATION IN PRS, ET CETERA, AND PUT IT INTO A WAY THAT'S EASILY INTERPRETED BY PEOPLE OUTSIDE, UM, OUR WORLD.
IT, IT, IT'S, THAT'S, YOU'RE, YOU'RE HITTING AT WHAT OUR PURPOSE IS.
IS THAT HELP HELP PEOPLE BECAUSE, BECAUSE AGAIN, WHEN WE'RE, WHEN WE'RE TALKING AT THE TAC OR THE PRS OR THE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS AND DIALOGUE AND,
[00:10:01]
AND TO CONSUME ALL THAT INFORMATION IN A BITE SIZED WAY.AND, AND, YOU KNOW, I'LL, I'LL PICK ON NED AND, AND THE PRESENTATION EARLIER, UM, UH, THE WORD RESILIENCY WAS USED NINE TIMES IN, IN THE DISCUSSION ABOUT 1275.
OKAY? SO IF YOU WANT TO TALK TO SOMEBODY THAT DOESN'T KNOW WHAT, IT'S JUST A NUMBER, WHAT'S 1279? WHY IS IT IMPORTANT? YES.
SO NOW YOU CAN HELP SPEED UP THAT DISCUSSION ABOUT WHY THAT MIGHT BE IMPORTANT AND, AND, UM, HELP THEM SEE WELL, OKAY, BUT HOW, HOW DOES RESILIENCY FIT WITHIN A FRAMEWORK? RIGHT.
AND, AND HELP THEM HELP THEM SEE WHERE THAT'S IMPORTANT.
SO WE ARE, THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO ATTEMPT TO TAKE THE VERY, UM, STEALING AWARD, OUR FORMER CEO CALLED US GEARHEAD TERMS, UH, THAT WE USE, AND THEN TURNING THEM INTO SOMETHING MUCH CLEANER AND MAYBE COLOR CODED, UM, THAT'S VIEWABLE ON LIKE A ONE PAGER YEAH.
YEAH, RESILIENCY, YOU COULD SAY IS A TOOL IN THE TOOLKIT.
AND, AND HOW IS THAT IMPORTANT? AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A PARTICULAR INITIATIVE LIKE 1275, HOW DOES THAT FIT WITHIN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO? OKAY.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, USE IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, WE TALKED ABOUT ASSESSING JUST ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE DID RIGHT HERE IS ASSESS THE INITIATIVES RELATIVE TO THE FRAMEWORK ATTRIBUTES.
UM, AND THEN ULTIMATELY IF WE HAVE TO PRIORITIZE INITIATIVES THAT ARE DISCRETIONARY, AGAIN, SOME OF THEM ARE NOT.
AND, AND WE RECOGNIZE THAT AS WELL.
THERE'S, YOU KNOW, HB 1500, UM, FIRMING REQUIREMENT, UH, DRRS, THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT YES, WE, THOSE ARE PRIORITIES THEY WILL GET DONE, BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT WE HAVE SOME DISCRETIONARY EFFORT, HOW DOES THAT FIT WITHIN THE TOOLKIT THAT WE ARE WE'RE DOING AND, AND, UM, ASSESS THOSE INITIATIVES.
[3. Update Framework Based on Feedback]
LET'S, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE ATTRIBUTES AGAIN.SO WE HAVE, UH, UH, A, A SLIDE THAT I'VE, I'VE SHOWN ON A FEW OCCASIONS.
UH, I THINK THE FEEDBACK OVERALL WAS, WAS FAIRLY POSITIVE ON AT LEAST THESE, THESE WHAT I CALL INITIAL ATTRIBUTES THAT WE HAVE.
UM, I THINK, UH, I WON'T SPEND MUCH TIME ON HERE, BUT JUST SAY THAT I THINK WE GENERALLY HAD A, A GOOD DISCUSSION ON THIS.
THERE WERE SOME, SOME ADDITIONS, AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN A SECOND.
UM, BUT I JUST WANTED TO PAUSE AND JUST SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, HERE'S SORT OF OUR INITIAL SET AND THEN WE'LL JUST MOVE TO THE NEXT ONE, WHICH HAS SORT OF OUR UPDATED ONES.
AND, AND WE WERE, THERE WERE A LOT OF, UH, GOOD COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED, UM, UH, LATE LAST YEAR AND, AND WE DISCUSSED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, AND THERE WAS, THERE WAS ULTIMATELY THREE THAT STOOD OUT, BUT I THINK WE'VE KIND OF COMBINED TWO OF THEM INTO THE COMPETITION ONE.
UH, BUT THE AFFORDABILITY, UH, IS, IS ONE THAT, UH, UH, CLEARLY THE CONSUMER SIDE, UH, FELT PRETTY STRONGLY ABOUT.
UH, AND, UH, I THINK, I THINK ORIGINALLY OUR THOUGHT WAS WHEN YOU LOOK AT A COUPLE OF THE KEY PILLARS THAT ERCOT WORKS ON, THAT THERE'S RELIABILITY PILLAR, THERE'S A AFFORDABILITY PILLAR, AND THERE'S SORT OF A, A PEOPLE PILLAR.
UH, AND SO, UH, THIS WAS, WAS ESSENTIALLY THAT, OH, BUT THERE'S AN AFFORDABILITY PILLAR.
UH, I THINK THE SENSE IS, AND, AND SOME OF THE DIALOGUE WE HAD LAST TIME IS, WELL, UH, IF, IF RELIABILITY ULTIMATELY IS THE PRIMARY TARGET, THEN WE, WE WANT TO CREATE, UH, A RELIABLE, AFFORDABLE, UH, SOLUTION.
AND, AND I THINK AS AN ATTRIBUTE THAT THAT ACTUALLY FITS PRETTY WELL.
SO, SO AS AN ADDITIONAL ATTRIBUTE, I, I THINK THIS IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT SEEMS TO MAKE SENSE GIVEN THAT DIALOGUE.
SO WE APPRECIATE THE, THE FEEDBACK WE WE HAD THERE.
AND THEN ANOTHER ITEM THAT CAME UP IN, IN SOME OF THE COMMENTS WAS, WAS COMPETITION, UH, AND THE IMPORTANCE OF COMPETITION AND INCLUSIVE, AND YOU'LL SEE THAT WE USE THE WORD INCLUSIVE HERE IN THE DESCRIPTION IS THAT, YEAH, THERE'S A LOT OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES OUT THERE AND THAT HELPS TO INCREASE THAT, THAT COMPETITION THAT, THAT WE SEE.
SO, UM, I, I, I SUPPOSE INCLUSIVE COMPETITION, BUT, BUT I THINK THAT COMPETITION COVERS BOTH THAT TECHNOLOGY ASPECT AS WELL, THAT YES, WE WANT IT TO BE AN INCLUSIVE COMPETITION THAT, THAT ALL, UH, ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF TECHNOLOGIES CAN, CAN BE A PART OF, AND THESE DIFFERENT MARKET MECHANISMS, UH, TO, TO DRIVE THAT COMPETITIVE OUTCOME.
AND, AND I THINK THAT THAT'S, UH, AN IMPORTANT PART OF, OF THE ERCOT MARKET IS THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT COMPETITION.
AND, AND WE SEE THAT, UH, IN, IN THE VARIOUS MECHANISMS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE.
UH, AND, AND THE ONES WE CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT.
UH, ALRIGHT, SO I'LL, I'LL PAUSE.
THESE ARE ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER UPDATED ATTRIBUTES AND SEE IF THERE ARE ANY POTENTIAL QUESTIONS THAT THAT FOLKS HAVE ON, ON THESE ADDITIONAL ONES.
[00:15:01]
SO, SO THINKING ON AFFORDABILITY, UM, DO YOU'VE COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND IN, IN SUPPORT MINIMIZING COSTS, UM, BUT I FEEL IT'S MAYBE ONE SIDED AND CURIOUS IF THERE'S THOUGHTS ON, UM, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF HOW, HOW TO PHRASE IT.BUT, UM, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT A PARTICULAR PRODUCT, LET'S SAY WE'RE DOING SOME SORT OF COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS, YOU JUST LOOK AT PURE CONSUMER COSTS.
DO WE JUST LOOK AT THE CONSUMER COSTS? WE ALSO INCLUDE THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, AVOIDED LOAD SHED LOSS OF LOAD PROBABILITY.
'CAUSE THAT'S ANOTHER CONSUMER COST THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY SHOWING UP IN ENERGY PRICING.
AND HOW DOES, HOW'S THAT KEY INTO AFFORDABILITY? DO WE HAVE A THOUGHT THERE, OR IS IT JUST KIND OF NO, I, I THINK YOU, YOU RAISED A GOOD POINT.
YOU KNOW, WE, THERE ARE DIFFERENT METRICS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, LIKE AVOIDED COSTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, SO, SO YEAH, I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, COSTS MORE BROADLY THAN JUST, YOU KNOW, A TANGIBLE COST.
BUT, BUT I THINK THE KEY WITH THIS ONE IS, AND, AND I THINK WE RECOGNIZE THAT, HEY, IF YOU'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE RELIABILITY, YOU KNOW, TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT PROMOTES IT IN AN AFFORDABLE WAY, RATHER THAN HAVING JUST, WELL, WE'RE JUST GONNA BEFOR AFFORDABLE AND THEN, EH, WELL, WHATEVER RELIABILITY COMES OUT OF THAT IS, IS OKAY.
NO, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE MEAN HERE.
WE MEAN IF YOU, IF YOU'VE GOT, IF YOU'RE GONNA SHOOT FOR RELIABILITY, WHAT ARE THE KEY ELEMENT, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE KEY INITIATIVE THAT'S GONNA ACHIEVE THAT? AND WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE COST EFFECTIVE WAY TO DO THAT? OKAY.
ALRIGHT, NED, UH, SO I THINK Y'ALL ARE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT I, I WANTED TO FLAG, I KNOW YOU'VE GOT SOME SLIDES LATER THAT'LL BRING THIS UP, BUT YEP.
HOW THE FRAMEWORK HELPS TO RECONCILE AND RESOLVE TENSIONS BETWEEN DIFFERENT ATTRIBUTES IS, UH, UH, I THINK A KEY THING TO, TO REALLY WORK THROUGH.
AND, UH, SO I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT Y'ALL ARE DESCRIBING, RIGHT? LIKE, WE ALL WANT TO HAVE, WE ALL WANNA MEET OUR RELIABILITY GOALS, BUT WANNA TO DO IT IN THE MOST AFFORDABLE WAY.
HOW DO YOU MAKE THOSE TWO THINGS WORK WHEN YEAH.
AND I, I THINK WHAT WILL BE NICE, PARTICULARLY AS WE THINK ABOUT HOW WE FRAME DECISIONS FOR DECISION MAKERS IS, IS MAYBE ALONG THAT LINES OF, HEY, THERE'S, THERE MAY BE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION, LET'S SAY IN TERMS OF, OKAY, HERE'S THE, HERE'S WHAT WE'RE SHOOTING AS OUR OBJECTIVE, HERE'S THE ATTRIBUTES AND, AND HERE'S THE TENSION THAT MIGHT EXIST.
TO THE EXTENT THE FRAMEWORK CAN HELP WITH THAT, THAT'S GREAT, BUT IT MAY HIGHLIGHT THE ISSUE FOR OUR, FOR OUR DECISION MAKERS AS WELL.
SETH, I JUST WANNA ASK, WHEN WOULD THIS BE EMPLOYED? LIKE, WHAT WOULD BE THE BAR FOR ACTUALLY INVOKING THE, UM, THIS FRAMEWORK ON A PARTICULAR PROPOSAL? I, I THINK ULTIMATELY WE'VE ALREADY STARTED TO BE QUITE HONEST, UM, UH, WE, WE SORT OF SEE IT IN USE TODAY, RIGHT? AND FOR FOLKS THAT, UH, THAT, AND, AND IN A WAY, AND, AND WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS, UM, WE HAVE SOME EXISTING INITIATIVES THAT ARE SORT OF IN THE PROCESS.
RTC IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT, RIGHT? AND SO WHEN WE, WE HAD OUR DISCUSSION AT THE GCPA ON, UM, YOU KNOW, A WEEK AGO MONDAY, UM, YOU KNOW, SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT, WE SAID, HEY, YOU KNOW, AS AN EFFICIENCY TOOL.
AND, UM, I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S BEEN A RECOGNITION OF, OKAY, YOU KNOW, IT MIGHT BE AN EFFICIENCY TOOL AND, AND IT DOES DO A FEW OTHER ATTRIBUTES AS WELL, BUT, AND AS, AS NED KIND OF POINTED OUT IS THERE'S SOME TENSION ON THAT.
AND SO AS WE THINK ABOUT WHAT THAT MIGHT MEAN, THAT MAY HELP US CONSIDER, UM, AND PRIORITIZE OTHER INITIATIVES AS THEY'RE COMING THROUGH THE PIPELINE.
SO IT'S MORE OF THE LARGER MARKET DESIGN TYPE INITIATIVES THAT WE UNDERTAKE, NOT LIKE THESE SORT OF ONE-OFF ONES THAT WE HAD TODAY WERE LIKE, MAYBE WE PROVE THE, UH, NPR THAT GAVE COST RECOVERY GENERATORS THAT WERE IMPACTED BY NCMP.
LIKE THAT, THOSE PROBABLY WOULDN'T REACH THE, THE BAR.
AND IF, IF WE, NOW, I WOULD SAY IS IMAGINE THIS, IMAGINE SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT ACTUALLY HAS A LARGE IMPACT ON STAFFING, LET'S SAY FOR ERCOT.
YOU KNOW, WE WOULD SAY, OKAY, IS THIS, IS THIS REALLY A PRIORITY RELATIVE TO OUR ATTRIBUTES, GIVEN THE STAFFING WE MIGHT HAVE TO EMPLOY TO DEAL WITH THAT 12, YOU KNOW, 1229, NOT A BIG DEAL, BUT, BUT THERE COULD BE SOME OTHER ONE.
DOES THIS, THEN THIS WHOLE FRAMEWORK FEEDS INTO THE PMO AT ERCOT IN TERMS OF PROJECT PRIORITIZATION? WELL, THAT'S, THAT'S AN INTERESTING POINT.
I KNOW THAT, UM, CAITLIN, MARTHA AND I HAVE HAD SOME, SOME PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT.
UM, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I DON'T WANNA GO TOO FAR ASTRAY ON THAT POINT RIGHT NOW, BUT JUST SORT OF NOTE THAT WHAT I'VE BEEN OBSERVING IS THAT WHEN YOU, YOU'VE KIND OF GOT THE PMO PRIORITIZATION PROCESS, BUT THERE'S SORT OF A, THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE AN NPR PRIORITIZATION PROCESS, RIGHT? SO YOU CAN SQUEEZE A LOT OF THINGS IN THAT ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, WILL GET PASSED AND THEN IT GETS RANKED AND THERE'S A COUPLE POINTS THAT THEY'LL JUST QUICKLY BANK ON.
THAT IS, ON ONE HAND, WHAT I'VE ALSO NOTICED IS THAT THERE ARE SOME REALLY OLD NPRS THAT ARE YEARS OLD THAT ARE JUST BASICALLY SITTING ON THE FLOOR
[00:20:01]
AND THEY MAY JUST SORT OF EXPIRE, YOU KNOW, THIS MEAT'S GONE BAD, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'S SO OLD THAT WE'VE ACTUALLY CREATED SOMETHING ELSE THAT SUPERSEDES IT, THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU CREATED NPR THAT'S DOESN'T DO ANYTHING, RIGHT? MM-HMMAND, AND THAT'S SORT OF AN INTERESTING OUTCOME, UM, THAT, THAT YOU WOULD'VE GONE THROUGH ALL THIS EFFORT TO CREATE AN NPR, THEN HAVE IT PRIORITIZED, HAVE IT DELAYED SO LONG THAT IT'S ACTUALLY NOT NEEDED ANYMORE.
AND SOME OF 'EM ARE NEEDED STILL, BUT THEY JUST KEEP KIDDING.
AND SOME OF THEM ARE NEEDED AND, AND, AND WHATNOT.
SO I, AND I THINK THE SECOND POINT IS, IS WHAT WE WERE DISCUSSING EARLIER IS LIKE, OH, WAIT A SECOND.
SO, SO KEITH IS SAYING THAT COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS, YEAH, WE'VE GOT STAFFING LIMITATIONS, WE'VE GOT, WE'VE GOT KEY PEOPLE AND KEY PEOPLE ARE WORKING ON CERTAIN INITIATIVES, AND FOR SOME REASON THERE'S A, THERE'S A, A DESIRE TO MOVE ANOTHER INITIATIVE THROUGH THE PROCESS.
IS THAT RESOURCE ACTUALLY AVAILABLE TO WORK ON THAT? IS THAT A PRIORITY FOR THAT RESOURCE TO WORK ON? AND, UM, I THINK THERE'S KIND OF AN INFORMAL PROCESS TODAY IN TERMS OF, WELL, YOU KNOW, DAVE OR S OR WHOEVER, YEAH, THEY HAVE TIME OR THEY, NO, THEY DON'T.
UM, BUT, BUT IF IT'S A PRIORITY, WELL THEN MAYBE THEY SHOULD BE WORKING ON IT, RIGHT? UM, AND IF IT'S NOT A PRIORITY, MAYBE THEY SHOULDN'T.
AND SO IF WE'RE SAYING, GEEZ, IS IT CHECKING A LOT OF BOXES OFF HERE IN THE, IN, IN THE FRAMEWORK, MAYBE WE SHOULD FOCUS ON THAT AND, AND MAYBE SOME OTHER PRIORITY THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON IS, YEAH, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW YOU'RE WORKING ON THAT, BUT IT ACTUALLY MAKES MORE SENSE FOR YOU TO WORK ON THIS.
SO I THINK IT CAN HELP IN THOSE WAYS TOO.
UM, JUST LOOKING BACK AT THE INITIAL ATTRIBUTE EFFICIENCY, THAT SEEMS TO BE CLOSE, BUT NOT EXACTLY THE SAME AS AFFORDABILITY.
UM, IT'S, IT'S CLOSE BUT NOT THE SAME.
AND, AND I THINK, UM, I THINK OUR RTC IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF IT AS, AS BEING A REALLY DEDICATED EFFICIENCY TOOL.
SO LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT,
[4. Discuss Measurement]
LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MEASUREMENT.I KNOW, UM, THIS, THIS CAME UP WITH, WITH BILL JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO.
UH, AND I KNOW, UH, NED, NED MADE SOME COMMENTS ON THIS LAST TIME AND, AND I THINK WHEN WE THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, MEASUREMENT AND MEASURING THE SUCCESS AND WHERE ARE WE, RIGHT? AND, AND I THINK, UH, NED'S POINT, IF, IF I MAY SORT OF PARAPHRASE WAS THAT, HEY, YOU KNOW, THE RELIABILITY STANDARD NEEDS TO PLAY A ROLE IN THAT.
AND I, I THINK FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, YEAH, THERE, IT'S A, IT'S A GOOD PLACE TO START IT WITH WITH RESPECT TO SOME OF THE, THE ATTRIBUTES THAT WE'VE, WE'VE LAID OUT.
IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY TOUCH ALL OF THEM, BUT YES, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT AVAILABILITY, FLEXIBILITY, DEPENDABILITY, SOME OF THESE KEY STANDARDS AND, AND HOW YOU PROMOTE RELIABILITY.
THAT, THAT DOES SEEM TO BE A REALLY GOOD, UM, ELEMENT TO START WITH.
UM, I, I WOULD NOTICE IT, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY COMPREHENSIVE, BUT IT IS AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT TO THINK OF AND, AND WE DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT.
UM, AND SO I KNOW AS THE RELIABILITY STANDARD IS, UH, AS, AS WE BEGIN THAT MEASUREMENT OF, OF WHERE THE ERCOT SYSTEM IS, IS RELATIVE TO THAT, I THINK WE'RE GONNA LEARN A LOT.
AND THAT'LL HELP ALSO DRIVE, I THINK, SOME OF THESE INITIATIVES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
WHAT KIND OF MARKET DESIGN DO WE NEED AND, AND WHAT TIMELINE DO WE NEED THAT AND WHAT'S OUR PRIORITIZATION? AND, AND SO I THINK THAT'S GONNA FIT, UH, FIT IN WITH THIS FOR SURE.
UM, BUT, BUT IS IT THE ONLY THING? NO, I, I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARILY THE ONLY THING, UM, UH, AND THAT GETS TO THE QUESTION OF, WELL, OKAY, WELL, WELL, WHAT OTHER MEASUREMENTS DO YOU NEED? AND I THINK IN, IN SOME WAYS, AND, AND A GOOD WAY TO THINK ABOUT THIS IS IN EVALUATING, FOR INSTANCE, OUR, OUR DRRS, WHICH IS, IS CURRENTLY UNDER, UNDER DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, YOU MIGHT THINK ABOUT, OKAY, THIS IS A FLEXIBILITY TOOL AS, AS AN ASLE SERVICE.
SO, OKAY, WELL, WELL, HOW MUCH FLEXIBILITY WOULD YOU NEED? AND IT SEEMS LIKE THAT TYPE OF STUDY ANALYSIS WOULD BE A GOOD MEASURE OF, WELL, OKAY, YOU'RE GONNA STUDY AND MEASURE WHAT THIS TOOL IS GOING TO GET YOU, AND THAT SHOULD REFLECT THE NEED OF FLEXIBILITY THAT YOU WOULD, WOULD BE REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE.
SO TO ME, THAT'S, THAT'S A, AN ADDITIONAL MEASURE OF, WELL, HOW MUCH FLEXIBILITY IS, IS NECESSARY AND, AND A STUDY COULD BE DONE AND, AND I WOULD IMAGINE WOULD LIKELY BE DONE TO ASSESS THAT FOR, FOR DRS, UM, I THINK SOME ATTRIBUTES ARE, OUR MARKET MONITOR DOES, UH, UH, DOES, DOES A GOOD JOB IN THEIR, THEIR STATE OF MARKETS REPORT, TALKING ABOUT, UH, EFFICIENCY, UH, IN PARTICULAR, UH, AND HIGHLIGHTING, UM, AREAS THAT COULD BE DONE MORE EFFICIENT.
AND, UM, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT'S IN THEIR ANNUAL REPORT, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S AN ASSESSMENT AND
[00:25:01]
A MEASUREMENT OF WHERE WE ARE ON SOME OF THESE THINGS AND HOW WE COULD POTENTIALLY IMPROVE.AND I, I LIKE TO THINK THAT, UH, WHEN WE DO GET THOSE, UH, THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COME IN, IN THE IMM REPORT, WE, WE EVALUATE, UM, WHAT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE.
AND, AND I THINK THAT IF WE WERE TO HAVE A FRAMEWORK AND IF THE IMM WERE TO CHOOSE TO, TO UTILIZE THAT FRAMEWORK IN THE REPORT, IT, IT COULD BE HELPFUL AS WELL IN, IN HELPING US UNDERSTAND, UM, HOW WE MIGHT INCORPORATE SOME OF THOSE, THOSE ITEMS. AND SO, AGAIN, I, I, AND, AND HAVING REVIEWED THE REPORTS, YES, THINGS LIKE EFFICIENCY ARE COVERED.
UM, AND, AND THAT CAN BE A WAY OF MEASUREMENT AS WELL.
NOT NECESSARILY TO SIGN HOMEWORK TO THE IMM, BUT IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY DO NATURALLY.
[5. Highlight Examples of Framework Use]
SO LET'S, LET'S TALK ABOUT SOME EXAMPLES.UM, AND I'M SURE YOU KNOW, PART OF IT IS IS THAT THERE'S, THERE'S GONNA BE, UM, SOME DIALOGUE.
I WOULD IMAGINE SOME PEOPLE MAY SEE THINGS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
AND TO ME THAT'S KIND OF HOW YOU USE THE FRAMEWORK IS, IS TO, YOU KNOW, IS IT, IS IT PERFECT? NO, YOU KIND OF THROW IT AT THE BOARD AND YOU SEE WHAT STICKS AND YOU, UH, ADAPT AND, AND, AND, AND I THINK AN EXAMPLE THAT CAME UP JUST THE OTHER DAY, AND I THINK AGAIN, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN NED TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S THE WEIGHT OF THE PIG, RIGHT? YOU KNOW, ONE PERSON MAY SAY, WELL, I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, 500 POUNDS AND YOU ASK A THOUSAND PEOPLE AND MAYBE YOU GOT THE RIGHT ANSWER.
AND, AND IN A WAY THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE DO IN OUR STAKEHOLDER PROCESS IS SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, WE SEE IT THIS WAY AND WE SEE IT THAT WAY, AND YOU GET DIFFERENT ANGLES AND, YOU KNOW, COLLECTIVELY WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET A GOOD VISION OF, YOU KNOW, HOW SOME OF THESE INITIATIVES FIT WITHIN IN THE FRAMEWORK.
SO, UH, AND, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO, TO NOTE THAT, UM, ANY INITIATIVE WE HAVE, AND I THINK, I THINK FOLKS REALIZE THIS IS, IT'S, IT'S A PIECE OF THE PUZZLE.
UH, IT, IT DOESN'T SOLVE EVERYTHING.
IT, IT, IT DEFINITELY ADDRESSES CERTAIN PIECES THAT, THAT MAY BE NEEDED OR LACKING OR REQUIRED.
UH, BUT COLLECTIVELY THE SET OF INITIATIVES CREATE OUR MARKET DESIGN, THE OVERALL MARKET DESIGN THAT WE HAVE TODAY.
AND COULD THAT BE BETTER? I THINK WE AGREE THAT YES, THERE ARE AREAS THAT WE NEED IMPROVEMENT AND, UM, YOU KNOW, HELPING TO SORT OF THINK ABOUT THAT AND PRIORITIZE THAT THROUGH, THROUGH A FRAMEWORK, I THINK IS, IS REALLY USEFUL.
ALRIGHT, SO I STARTED WITH PROBABLY THE MOST OBVIOUS ONE HERE IS REALTIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION PLUS BATTERIES, RTC PLUS B.
UM, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, EFFICIENCY, I, I PUT THAT AT THE TOP.
I, I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT THAT, THAT YES, IT EFFICIENTLY OPTIMIZES ENERGY, YOU KNOW, ADDRESS CONGESTION, ANSWER SERVICES REAL TIME.
I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY GOOD.
AND, AND I THINK WE'VE BEEN A BIG SUPPORTER OF THAT.
UH, MANY OF YOU HAVE BEEN BIG SUPPORTERS OF THAT.
AND, AND THE, THE BENEFITS YOU RECEIVE ON THAT, THERE ARE OTHER BENEFITS.
IT INCREASES FLEXIBILITY AS WE SHIFT RESOURCES FROM LOWER COST RESOURCES TO ADJUST TO THESE CHANGING CONDITIONS.
SO IT, IT ENHANCES OUR FLEXIBILITY.
IT, IT, IT DOES HAVE A LOCATIONAL ELEMENT AS WE THINK ABOUT CONGESTION AND THAT YOU'RE RETIMING AND MOVING TO RESOLVE CONSTRAINTS.
SO IT HAS LOCATIONAL BENEFITS, IT, IT, WITH THE PLUS BATTERIES, IT HAS A COMPETITION ELEMENT.
YES, IT'S INCLUSIVE OF THESE NEW TECHNOLOGIES.
AND AS WE DO THAT, WE'D EXPECT THAT TO, UH, HELP ADDRESS COSTS.
WE, WE SEE THAT TOUCHING ON, THERE'S, THERE'S AT LEAST FOUR AND I, I THINK I, I, UH, ONCE I, I CREATED A TABLE AND WE'LL GET TO THE TABLE IN A FEW MINUTES.
UM, IT, IT TOUCHES ON QUITE A FEW OF THE, IN THE, UM, THE DIFFERENT ATTRIBUTES.
UH, I, I KNOW THERE'S SOME CONCERN THAT, HEY, IT COULD BE A PLUS IN, IN SOME AND, AND MAYBE IT'S A MINUS IN THE OTHERS.
AND, AND, AND I DO HAVE, UH, I DO HAVE THAT RECOGNIZED IN, IN THE TABLE THAT WE SEE, BUT I THINK, I THINK HOPEFULLY WE CAN SEE THAT, YEAH, THIS, THIS IS THE, THE, THE ATTRIBUTES IN ACTION AND, AND SAY THAT IT IS, IN THIS CASE, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S TOUCHING ON SEVERAL OF THESE ITEMS. DRRS, ANOTHER ONE.
UH, THAT'S, THAT, THAT WE TALK A LOT ABOUT.
DISPATCHABLE, RELIABILITY RESERVE SERVICE.
IT'S A FLEXIBILITY TOOL PRIMARILY.
UH, WE VALUE DISPATCHABLE CAPACITY.
HOW DO WE, HOW DO WE, UM, ENSURE THE SYSTEM WHEN THERE'S A, AN EVENT, RIGHT? SO YEAH, IT'S A, IT'S A RAMPING TOOL.
SO IT'LL HELP IMPROVE RESILIENCY, DEPENDABILITY, UM, AGAIN, VALUING RESOURCE THAT CAN ACHIEVE THOSE RAMPING AND DISPATCH LEVELS AND FOR THE, THE DURATION THAT WE NEED THEM TO BE.
[00:30:01]
DRRS, IT DOES TOUCH ON, ON SEVERAL ITEMS, UH, PCM, SO PERFORMANCE, CREDIT MECHANISM, AND, AND YES, I DID RECOGNIZE IT WAS SHELVED, UH, BUT IT, IT DID HAVE PARTICULAR ATTRIBUTES THAT IT, IT DID ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS, UH, AVAILABILITY, UH, IN, UM, UH, PROMOTE DISPATCHABLE CAPACITY, CAPACITY AND, AND REWARDING AVAILABILITY OF RESOURCES.THAT THAT IS WHAT IT, IT, IT HAD A DESIGN TO, TO ACHIEVE, UH, DEPENDABILITY.
AGAIN, PROVIDING INCENTIVES, UH, TO IMPROVE RESOURCE PERFORMANCE.
UH, IT WAS, WAS DESIGNED TO DO THAT.
UM, AND, AND THIS ONE MAY BE A BIT MORE DEBATABLE, BUT, UM, MY SENSE IS, UH, UH, AN ARGUMENT COULD BE MADE THAT IT, IT ACTUALLY WAS, WAS IN THAT AFFORDABILITY BUCKET.
UM, YOU COULD SAY, WELL, IT'S INCREASING COSTS.
AND I THINK THIS IS WHAT, WHAT DAVID WAS GETTING ABOUT EARLIER.
IT'S LIKE, YEAH, IT'S INCREASING COSTS, BUT IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY, UM, THERE WAS THE MECHANISM IN THERE TO BALANCE THE ENERGY REVENUES AND ESSENTIALLY THESE SORT OF CREDIT MECHANISM PAYMENTS.
AND IF IT WAS A GOOD YEAR, IF IT WAS NOT A GOOD YEAR, AND IT, IT HAD A MECHANISM TO SORT OF BALANCE THAT, WHICH, UM, DID SEEM TO BE, AT LEAST IN MY MIND, AN AFFORDABILITY METRIC.
AGAIN, THERE COULD BE SOME DIFFERENCE OF OPINIONS, BUT THAT'S KIND OF HOW I SAW THAT, RIGHT? OR DC OKAY, SO THIS ONE IS A, AN OLDIE BUT GOODIE.
SO THIS IS, UH, OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN AROUND FOR A LITTLE WHILE, NOT NECESSARILY IN A NEW INITIATIVE.
UH, BUT AGAIN, IT TOUCHES ON SEVERAL THINGS.
AVAILABILITY WITH THE SCARCITY PRICING TO PROMOTE AVAILABILITY OF RESOURCES, COMPETITION, UH, FLEXIBILITY FOR, OR, YOU KNOW, RESOURCES THAT, THAT ARE FASTER, UM, UH, HAVE MORE VALUE.
SO AGAIN, UH, ORDC AND THE DIFFERENT ITEMS, ECRS, UH, IS ANOTHER RESILIENCY TOOL, UM, ENSURING THAT WE HAVE SUFFICIENT RESOURCES WHEN WE HAVE, UH, EVENTS OCCUR.
AND, AND THIS ONE, THE, THE, THE, THE THIRD ONE I THOUGHT WAS INTERESTING IS, IS QUALITY.
WE DON'T ALWAYS TALK ABOUT QUALITY, BUT IT HAS A DURATION VALUE.
AND, UH, AND SO I WOULD ARGUE THAT THAT FALLS INTO THAT QUALITY BUCKET THAT WE'RE VALUING DURATION.
UH, AND, AND THERE'S A NEED FOR THAT.
AND, AND WE SEE THAT IN THE ECRS, UH, HB 1500.
UH, I REALIZE THIS ONE IS KIND OF ON THE TO-DO LIST.
UH, AND, AND THERE MAY BE SOME, SOME CHANGES, MAYBE, MAYBE NOT.
UH, BUT, UH, THE FIRMING REQUIREMENT, UH, I WOULD ARGUE IS A DEPENDABILITY TOOL, UH, THAT WE, WE WANT TO DEPEND ON THE OUTPUT OF RESOURCES.
AND, AND THAT'S REALLY ULTIMATELY THE GOAL OF FIRMING.
UH, AND, AND SO, UM, UH, UH, THAT'S THE PRIMARY ELEMENT AND UH, UH, AND, AND THERE IS ANOTHER ELEMENT WITHIN THAT REQUIREMENT THAT SAYS, GEEZ, WHAT IF YOU'RE, YOU'RE EVEN MORE DEPENDABLE.
WELL, THERE, THERE COULD BE SOME ADDITIONAL INCENTIVES FOR THAT AS WELL, RIGHT? SO THAT TAKES US TO THE TABLE, AND I THINK THE TABLE WAS, UH, SORT OF TRIES TO PUT IT ALL TOGETHER AND HIGHLIGHT THAT AS WE, WE LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT ATTRIBUTES, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THEM ARE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THIS IS ILLUSTRATIVE.
WE, SOMEBODY MAY SAY, WELL, I THINK THERE'S, YOU HAVE TWO PLUS PLUSES AND TWO MINUSES.
I THINK IT SHOULD BE TWO OR THREE OR ONE OR WHATEVER.
I THINK THE POINT HERE IS THAT GENERALLY YOU CAN SEE HOW THE FRAMEWORK CAN BE USED TO DO A CROSS VIEW OF, OF THE DIFFERENT INITIATIVES THAT WE SEE HERE AND HOW THEY, THEY SORT OF HIGHLIGHT DIFFERENT ELEMENTS OF THE FRAMEWORK.
SO RTC PLUS B, REALLY GOOD ON EFFICIENCY.
DRS IS AN ANS SERVICE FLEXIBILITY, PCM AVAILABILITY, UM, ECRS RESILIENCY, HB 1500 DEPENDABILITY.
SO THESE DIFFERENT INITIATIVES REALLY HIGHLIGHT DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT THEN AGAIN, YOU, YOU SEE HOW, UH, THEY AFFECT, THEY CAN HAVE IMPACT AND EFFECTIVENESS ON, ON DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT ELEMENTS.
AND, YOU KNOW, I'LL PICK ON ECRS FOR A MINUTE.
AND, AND OUR, OUR IMM IS HERE, UH, THEY CLEARLY HAD AN A CONCERN WITH ECRS AND FELT THAT IT, IT WAS A, IT WAS AN EFFICIENCY NEGATIVE.
UH, AND SO, UM, SO I'VE REFLECTED THAT HERE.
UH, AND, AND I KNOW NED, YOU'VE, YOU'VE BEEN VERY VOCAL ABOUT OUR TC PLUS B AND THE, THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THAT ON AVAILABILITY.
SO THAT IS ALSO REFLECTED HERE.
BUT AGAIN, THIS IS MORE ILLUSTRATIVE ABOUT HOW YOU CAN GET A SENSE OF, HEY, THIS IS WHAT THIS TOOL IS DOING AS WE LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT INITIATIVES AND THE ONES WE'VE
[00:35:01]
EITHER WORKED ON, THE ONES WE ARE WORKING ON, THE ONES WE MIGHT WORK ON, AND HOW THEY FIT WITHIN THIS.[6. Address Outstanding Questions and Gather Feedback]
SEE IF WE'VE GOT SOME COMMENTS.SO, UM, WE'LL GO FROM NED AND WE'LL GO FROM FROM THERE, UM, UH, ON THERE.
SO THE, I THINK THE KEY TERM HERE IS THIS IS ILLUSTRATIVE.
SO IT, UH, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD IS, WELL, HOW, HOW ARE THE SCORES GRADED? BUT THIS IS, THIS IS REALLY JUST KINDA SHOW HOW IT MIGHT LOOK.
AND SO THAT, MY SECOND QUESTION WAS GONNA BE LIKE, IS THE, THE SHELVED PCM, IS THAT WITH A NET COST CAP OR A GROSS COST CAP? BUT THAT PROBABLY IS ALSO ILLUSTRATIVE.
SO ILLUSTRATIVE, WE CAN SET THAT ASIDE.
I GUESS, UH, RECOGNIZING THIS IS ILLUSTRATIVE.
MY QUESTION IS, WHO DO YOU ENVISION DOING THE SCORING AND HOW WOULD THE SCORING BE RESOLVED WHEN THERE ARE DISPUTES? SO MY, MY SENSE WOULD BE, UM, THAT THERE WOULD BE DIALOGUE WITHIN, LET'S SAY WE'RE, UM, WE'RE IN A, A WORKING GROUP OR A PART OF THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, AND WE'RE THINKING ABOUT THE, UM, THE INITIATIVE.
UH, MY SENSE IS THAT ERCOT MAY COME UP WITH A PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF, HEY, THIS IS KIND OF WHAT WE THINK, LET'S TALK ABOUT IT.
AND THERE'D BE SOME DIALOGUE AMONGST THE STAKEHOLDERS.
AND LIKE YOU SAID, THERE MAY BE A, YOU KNOW, LET'S PICK ON RTC HERE.
UM, NED MAY SAY, YEAH, I, I REALLY THINK AVAILABILITY IS FOUR MINUS, RIGHT? AND, UM, AND, AND, AND MARK MIGHT SAY, YEAH, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY MINUSES AT ALL.
SO, SO HOW WOULD THAT, HOW WOULD THAT COME ABOUT IN TERMS OF THE TIEBREAKER? I, I THINK OUR SENSE THERE IS TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT THERE IS A, A SIGNIFICANT GAP, I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO PRESENT THAT TO OUR, OUR, OUR, UH, DECISION MAKERS AND SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, HERE'S THE INITIATIVE.
HERE'S, HERE'S GENERALLY HOW IT WAS RANKED.
UM, BUT, BUT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A GAP IN, IN UNDER, IN, IN VIEW ON, ON HOW THIS MIGHT BE.
YOU KNOW, ONE GROUP OF FOLKS MAY THINK THIS, ONE GROUP OF FOLKS MAY THINK THAT.
AND, AND TO ME THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE I THINK WHAT IT WOULD DO IS HELP THOSE DECISION MAKERS UNDERSTAND WHERE THE, WHERE THE DISCONNECT IS BETWEEN THE TWO GROUPS, RIGHT? HOW ARE THEY NOW? AND, AND, AND HIGHLIGHT WHERE THE, THE AREA OF CONCERN IS AND, AND HOW ALLOW THEM TO FOCUS IN ON, OKAY, HOW DO WE BETTER UNDERSTAND WHY THE PERSPECTIVE OF A PARTICULAR GROUP MAY BE THIS WAY OR THAT WAY.
AND I THINK THAT'S, THAT, THAT TO ME WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR, FOR A DECISION MAKER.
BUT, UM, MY SENSE IS THAT YOU'RE RIGHT, WE'RE, WE'RE PROBABLY NOT GONNA END UP WITH CONSENSUS ON ALL OF THESE.
SOME OF THEM WE MIGHT, SOME OF THEM WE MAY NOT.
AND I THINK THAT'S ULTIMATELY OKAY.
UM, BUT I THINK THE FRAMEWORK CAN BE USED TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THOSE DIFFERENCES AND, AND, AND CREATE SOME DIALOGUE AROUND THAT.
SO, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK YOU ALREADY KNOW MY COMMENTS FROM, FROM EARLIER IN THE YEAR THAT YES, I'M STRUGGLING WITH THE INCREMENTAL VALUE OF ADDING THIS FRAMEWORK ON ONTO THE PROCESS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE.
AND SO ARE YOU ENVISIONING THAT THIS THEN BECOMES AN ADDITIONAL ADD-ON TO THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS WHERE, FOR INSTANCE, IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE CONSIDERING AN NPRR, THAT WE ALSO INCORPORATE THE FRAMEWORK INTO THAT DISCUSSION AND AT LEAST, UH, MAKE AN EFFORT TO ACHIEVE CONSENSUS ON THIS SCORING SO THAT THEN WE CAN USE THAT AS A TOOL TO PREVENT, TO PRESENT TO DECISION MAKERS IF, IF WE CAN YES.
THAT, THAT WOULD BE A, A GREAT USE OF, OF THE FRAMEWORK BECAUSE, 'CAUSE I THINK PART OF MY STRUGGLE IS WE HAVE THIS COMPLEX DECISION MAKING PROCESS MM-HMM
THAT HAS BALANCED MARKET SEGMENTS AND ALL THESE LEVELS MM-HMM
AND IF THE FRAMEWORK IS SCORED FROM OUTSIDE OF THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, THERE IS AN INCONGRUITY MM-HMM
THAT, UM, I'M NOT SURE IT WOULD REFLECT THE DECISIONS OF THE PROCESS.
SO IF WE'RE GOING TO USE THE FRAMEWORK, THEN I THINK IT HAS TO BE AN EMBEDDED ELEMENT OF THE PROCESS AND NOT EXTERNAL TO IT.
IAN
[00:40:01]
AND, AND, AND PUTTING 'EM DOWN INTO THIS.AND I UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF THAT, BUT THEN I BELIEVE WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY IS, AND THEN YOU WILL USE THAT TO EXPLAIN STAKEHOLDER POSITIONS TO HIRE GROUPS.
IT, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY, IT, IT CAN HELP, IT CAN HELP DECISION MAKERS UNDERSTAND WHERE THE AREA OF CONFLICT IS WITHIN A PARTICULAR INITIATIVE.
AND, AND I'M TRYING TO THINK BACK THERE, THERE WERE SOME DISCUSSIONS THAT I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH AND TRYING TO HELP FOLKS UNDERSTAND, UM, DIS WHERE THE NATURE OF AN ISSUE IS, WHAT IS IT THAT A PARTICULAR GROUP, AT LEAST FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, UH, IS AND, AND HELP THEM OUT.
AND, AND IT'D BE NICE FOR INSTANCE, IF WE HAD A FRAMEWORK AND IT WAS CLEAR IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS THAT THESE PEOPLE AND THOSE PEOPLE WERE NOT AGREEING ON WHERE THIS SORT OF FIT WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK THAT TWO DIFFERENT POLAR SIDES OF, OR THE VIEW ON THAT, THAT MAKES IT EASY TO SAY, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF US INTERPRETING THAT FOR, FOR DECISION MAKERS, WE CAN SAY, HEY, WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHERE THIS NEEDS TO FIT.
AND, AND REALLY THERE'S JUST TWO DIFFERENT VIEWS ON, ON, ON THIS PARTICULAR ELEMENT.
AND I THINK THAT CAN BE REALLY HELPFUL IN THEM UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE DEBATE THAT MAY BE OCCURRING IN, IN THE, UM, IN THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS.
UM, WITHOUT, WITHOUT NECESSARILY ERCOT HAVING TO STEP IN SAYING, WELL, WE THINK THESE PEOPLE THINK THAT, AND THOSE PEOPLE THINK THIS, NO, NO, IT, IT'LL HELP GIVE US A, A, A WAY OF PRESENTING THAT WITHOUT HAVING TO, YOU KNOW, STEP IN TO, TO, TO TRY TO PROVIDE ANY, OKAY.
I'LL THINK ABOUT THAT SOME MORE.
SO YEAH, IAN, WHEN I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS, I, I KIND OF GO BACK TO, YOU KNOW, COMING OUT OF THE, THE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION, I THINK ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS AT THE TIME SAID, WELL, WE HAVE, WHAT WE HAVE IS A DIRECTIVE TO USE A SUM OF THE PARTS APPROACH TO MARKET DESIGN POLICY.
NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, DON'T JUST DO ONE BIG ONE, BUT, YOU KNOW, TAKE A DIFFERENT PIECES AND PUT THEM TOGETHER IN A WAY THAT MAKES SENSE.
SO, YOU KNOW, KEITH, IS IT, IS IT OVEREXTENDING TO SAY THAT THE FRAMEWORK IS MEANT TO HELP SHOW WHAT THAT SUM OF THE PARTS PICTURE LOOKS LIKE? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
WHAT IS THE SUM OF THE PARTS AND THE VARIOUS INITIATIVES THAT WE SEE HERE ARE, ARE AN EXAMPLE OF THOSE PARTS THAT ARE BEING PUT TOGETHER, RIGHT? IT'S THAT FOREST FOR THE TREES, RIGHT? YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE WE, WE, YOU KNOW, YOU THINK OF AN INITIATIVE AS A BUNCH OF TREES, HOW DO THEY FIT TOGETHER, RIGHT? AND, AND ULTIMATELY THEY, THEY DECIDE, AND I THINK THAT WAS A POINT THAT WAS MADE EARLY ON, IS WELL, THEY DECIDE EXACTLY, BUT DO THEY WANT SHADED TREES? DO THEY WANT FRUIT TREES? DO THEY WANT, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO THEY WANT IN THEIR FOREST? RIGHT? AND SOMETIMES YOU CAN'T SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE WITHOUT DOING A TABLE SUCH AS THIS, BRIAN.
ALRIGHT, LET'S GO TO THE WAY BACK MACHINE TO THE YEAR, UH, 20 20 12 AND, UM, JUNE 1ST, I THINK IT WAS BRAD PUT OUT THIS REPORT AND UM, THEY, THEY BASICALLY LAY OUT ALL THE WAYS THAT YOU CAN ACHIEVE RESOURCE ADEQUACY.
AND IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE SUM OF THE PARTS MM-HMM
THERE ARE, ARE IN THEIR TABLE, WHICH IS PAGE NINE OF 139, UM, ENERGY ONLY MARKET WITH MARKET BASED RESERVE MARGIN ENERGY ONLY MARKET WITH ADDERS TO SUPPORT A TARGET RESERVE MARGIN ENERGY ONLY MARKET WITH BACKSTOP PROCUREMENT AT MINIMAL ACCEPTABLE RELIABILITY.
AND THEN IT GOES ON FROM THERE TO A PLACE WHERE I DON'T THINK WE ARE QUITE YET, BUT IT'S A MANDATORY RESOURCE ADEQUACY REQUIREMENT FOR LSCS.
AND THEN THE LAST ONE IS A RESOURCE ADEQUACY REQUIREMENT WITH CENTRALIZED FORWARD CAPACITY MARKET.
IT WOULD BE NICE, UH, FOR, FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS, IF YOU KNEW YOU WERE IN STEP ONE, TWO, OR THREE TO, TO BE ABLE TO, UM, HAVE, UH, YOUR DIALS THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE FOR YOUR, SOME OF THE PARTS MM-HMM
WELL IF, IF I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, THIS IDEA OF, YOU KNOW, IS IT A CAPACITY MARKET, IS IT WHATEVER IT IS, I DON'T KNOW THAT WORD.
I'M, I'M SAYING WE'RE NOT AT THAT POINT YET.
NO, I, I I'M SAYING IF, IF THE, IF THE, UH, GOAL IS A SUM OF THE PARTS MARKET, ARE YOU USING, ARE YOU ARE, HOW BINDING IS THE, IS THIS REQUIREMENT TO ACHIEVE THE RESERVE MARGIN? BECAUSE THAT'S THE THING THAT HELPS INFORM HOW MUCH YOU CAN RELY ON ON ANY OF THESE TOOLS.
AND THAT'S KIND OF A QUESTION THAT'S STILL UNANSWERED THAT, THAT'S
[00:45:01]
MY COMMENT ABOUT THIS WHOLE PROCESS.YOU MEAN THE RE LIKE A, A PLANNING RESERVE MARGIN? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? UH, YEAH.
ABOUT A JUST RESOURCE ADEQUACY IN IN GENERAL.
WELL, I, I THINK ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, NOW YOU'RE TALKING TO ME, IT'S GETS BACK TO THAT MEASUREMENT DISCUSSION WE HAD A FEW MINUTES AGO.
AND THIS IDEA OF THE RELIABILITY STANDARD IS, IS, IS TO ME THAT'S GONNA DRIVE SOME OF WHAT I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
BUT THEN WHAT I THINK YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE SOME OF THE, THE POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS IN TERMS OF APPROACH.
BUT, UM, I, I GUESS, I GUESS I'M NOT COMPLETELY FOLLOWING YOUR QUESTION.
YOU'VE GOT ALL THESE ATTRIBUTES HERE MM-HMM
BUT WHAT ARE YOU SOLVING FOR WITH IT? OH, OH, YOU MEAN WHAT'S, WHAT'S OUR, WHAT'S OUR BIG MARKET DESIGN PICTURE? YEAH.
WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE FOREST? IS THE FOREST THE ENERGY ONLY MARKET WITH RESERVES, WITH A, YOU KNOW, WITH A RESERVE MARGIN THAT JUST LETS THE MARKET SOLVE? OR IS IT SOMETHING WITH ADDERS OR IS IT SOMETHING WITH UM, UH, BACKSTOP PROCUREMENT? WELL, I, I THINK THE ULTIMATE GOAL IS RELIABILITY, RIGHT? I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE TRIED, STARTED AT WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE MISSION, WHAT'S THE OBJECTIVE? HOW DO WE ACHIEVE A RELIABLE MARKET, A RELIABLE OUTCOME THROUGH MARKETS? RIGHT.
I I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE AIMING FOR.
I, I UNDERSTAND WHY HE IS ASKING THOUGH, BECAUSE TO GET TO RELIABILITY MM-HMM
UM, GENERALLY YOU HAVE TO, TO SOME DEGREE, UM, CUT OUT AFFORDABILITY AND EFFICIENCY OR DING THEM.
SO YOU HAVE TO KNOW YOUR END GOAL OF RELIABILITY THAT YOU'RE SOLVING FOR.
'CAUSE IF YOU'RE SOLVING FOR A HUNDRED PERCENT GUARANTEED RELIABILITY, THEN AFFORDABILITY AND EFFICIENCY, YOU CAN, YOU WOULD GRADE ON A CURVE SO THAT, WHICH YOU DON'T REALLY CARE IF YOU SPEND A HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS A DAY BECAUSE THE ULTIMATE END GOAL IS TO MAKE SURE WE NEVER GET CLOSE TO SCARCITY AGAIN.
SO UNTIL YOU HAVE THAT END THING THAT YOU'RE SOLVING FOR, YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO GRADE THEM, I THINK IS WHAT I'M HEARING FROM BRIAN.
I LOOK, I THINK MARKETS WORK BEST WHEN, UM, BUYERS SAY THE THING THAT THEY WANT AND ALLOW SELLERS TO COMPETE FOR IT.
AND I DON'T FEEL LIKE WE ERCOT THE COMMISSION MAYBE HAVE SAID THE THING THAT THEY WANTED.
I MEAN, YEAH, I HEAR YOU SAY RELIABILITY, BUT IS IT, IS IT GONNA BE SOMETHING THAT'S, UM, BINDING OR NOT? UH, I, I THINK, I THINK WHAT WE WERE GETTING AT EARLIER WAS IF, IF WE'RE GOING TO USE THE RELIABILITY STANDARD AS A MEASURE, RIGHT.
THAT THAT WOULD BE A WAY OF GETTING IT, I THINK WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, WHAT'S THAT PICTURE LOOK LIKE? DOES THAT, DOES THAT HELP? YES.
AND I, I, I THINK I HAD A BUTT DIAL FROM DAN JONES, SO I MUST BE SAYING SOMETHING THAT'S EITHER RIGHT OR WRONG.
ALRIGHT, WELL, WELL DAN COULD ALWAYS COMMENT IF HE'D LIKE, SO ANYWAY, HOPEFULLY THAT HELPS.
UM, I'LL JUST NOT SCANNING TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
UM, MOVE FORWARD A LITTLE BIT.
THIS IS JUST ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE VIEW OF WHAT WE JUST PRESENTED.
I, I DO, I HAVE, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A SPIDER CHART.
I DID PUT ALL THE INITIATIVES ON ONE.
UM, THIS IS SORT OF THEM BROKEN OUT.
I, I PERSONALLY LIKE THE TABLE, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'LL, WE'LL SORT OF USE, USE ONE OR THE OTHER AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
LIKE I SAID, I LIKE THE TABLE.
UM, UH, BUT, BUT FOLKS MAY, MAY FIND ME AND SAY, WELL, I, I I THAT THEY LIKE THE TABLE, THEY DON'T LIKE THE TABLE.
SO WE WE'VE BEEN HAVING SOME GOOD DIALOGUE.
I I, I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.
AND, UH, BUT I DID WANNA OPEN IT UP FOR, UH, YOU KNOW, OTHER INSIGHTS.
I KNOW, I KNOW BRIAN JUST, YOU KNOW, HAD HIS INSIGHT THAT SORT OF SEEMS TO FALL INTO THIS, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE, HEY, IF, IF WE WERE TO TAKE A SNAPSHOT, I, I THINK WHAT'S DIFFICULT, AND I THINK YOU'RE ASKING THE QUESTION, I THINK THIS GETS TO, UM, IF ONLY WE COULD GO TALK TO THE, THE REGULATORS OR THE LEGISLATURE AND SAY, WHAT EXACTLY IS THE PICTURE THAT YOU WANT TO PAINT? RIGHT? WHAT DOES IT NEED TO BE? AND I, I THINK WHAT WHAT WE TAKE IS, IS WELL THEY WANT TO BE RELIABLE, RIGHT? OR THEY, YOU KNOW, THE, WE HAVE THE RELIABILITY STANDARD, RIGHT? THEY, THEY GIVE YOU THOSE THINGS.
UM, AND SO WE'RE GONNA WORK WITH, WITH THOSE, THAT PIECE OF GUIDANCE THAT WE HAVE AND INCORPORATE THAT IN WHAT WE'RE AIMING FOR.
AND THEY'VE TOLD US THEY WANT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, DRS, THEY WANT, THEY WANT FLEXIBILITY.
THEY TOLD US THEY WANT FLEXIBILITY, HB 1500, THEY WANT DEPENDABILITY.
THESE, THESE PROJECTS WILL BE DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE THOSE ELEMENTS.
[00:50:01]
AND, AND I THINK, UM, IN, IN A WAY WE'RE KIND OF HELPING PAINT THAT PICTURE FOR THEM WITH THE ELEMENTS THAT THEY'VE GIVEN US.SO IN THE, IN THE TABLE YOU'VE INCLUDED SOME VERY BIG PICTURE RELIABILITY ORIENTED, UM, DESIGN PROPOSALS.
I'M WONDERING IF YOU CONSIDER THIS FRAMEWORK ALSO, UH, USEFUL FOR INFORMING DECISION MAKERS ON, ON OTHER SMALLER PICTURE ISSUES.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, I'M THINKING ABOUT TWO NRR RECENTLY APPROVED AND OPPOSED BY THE CONSUMER MARKET SEGMENT, NPRR 1190.
AND TODAY WE APPROVED NPRR 1229.
AND DO YOU SEE THOSE SMALLER PICTURE ISSUES FITTING INTO THIS FRAMEWORK INITIATIVE? OR IS THE FRAMEWORK INITIATIVE REALLY FOR THE BIGGER PICTURE ISSUES? LIKE THE ONES, UH, BRIAN WAS TALKING ABOUT AND DAN WAS COMMENTING ON IN HIS POCKET? SO, SO I THINK THE KEY IS, AND THE CHA THE CHALLENGE IS, UH, TO THE EXTENT THAT A CASE CAN BE MADE, AND, AND I THINK THIS WOULD, COULD BE HELPFUL, IS MAKE THE CASE FOR HOW THESE INITIATIVES FALL WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK THAT THEY'RE, I THINK FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, THINKING ABOUT 11 NOW, 1190, UM, WE DON'T HAVE AN OPINION ON.
AND, AND THE REASON WHY WE SAID, HEY, YOU KNOW, WE LOOKED AT THIS FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, THE ERCOT PERSPECTIVE, AND FELT THAT IT DIDN'T HAVE A RELIABILITY ELEMENT.
NOW I KNOW THE CONSUMERS MIGHT'VE SAID THEY DID, AND I THINK THAT'S FINE, UH, IN THE TERMS OF, HEY, THERE'S A POTENTIALLY A DISAGREEMENT HERE.
BUT THE CONSUMERS MAY SAY, HEY, LOOK AT, WE LOOK AT THIS FRAMEWORK AND WE SEE THIS AFFECTING THIS ATTRIBUTE AND THAT ATTRIBUTE, AND WE HAVE A CONCERN FOR THESE REASONS.
I, I THINK THAT'S, THAT KIND OF GETS TO YOUR QUESTION OF WHAT IF THERE'S A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AND, AND I THINK THAT MAKING THE CASE POTENTIALLY ON SOME OF THESE SMALLER ONES, UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, TO PULL AWAY A LITTLE BIT FROM THE, THE 1290, THE 1220 NINES AND 1190S, UM, THINKING ABOUT CONSTELLATIONS MITIGATION REQUIREMENT, LIKE, OKAY, HELP US, HELP US, HELP US SEE HOW THAT FITS IN THE FRAMEWORK.
AND, UM, MAYBE ANDY, YOU KNOW, YOUR HOMEWORK IS TO THINK ABOUT THE FRAMEWORK AND THINK ABOUT HOW THAT THAT MITIGATION PROPOSAL FITS WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK.
'CAUSE I, I DON'T KNOW HOW IT DOES AND MAYBE YOU CAN MAKE A CASE FOR THAT AND IT SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT.
YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M, I'M THINKING BACK TO WHEN I WAS A DECISION MAKER.
UM, AND THE TIME THAT I SPENT ON THIS BOARD AND WHEN AN ISSUE, LET'S TAKE 1190 CAME UP, THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT'S GOT A 10 YEAR HISTORY AT THE COMMISSION AT, YOU KNOW, THROUGH THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS.
THE INFORMATION THAT I NEEDED AS A DECISION MAKER TO INFORM MY DECISION MAKING WAS VERY DEEP.
I NEEDED TO KNOW THE 10 YEAR HISTORY OF THAT ISSUE.
AND AS I, AS I LOOK THROUGH THE CATEGORIES ON AN ISSUE LIKE THAT, I, I JUST DON'T SEE MUCH ILLUSTRATIVE THAT IS GOING TO BENEFIT ME OR INFORM ME AS A DECISION MAKER IF I GET WHAT I NEED.
WHICH IS, UM, WHICH IS THE, THE INFORMATION THAT RELATES TO THE HISTORY AND THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ISSUE.
'CAUSE OUR BOARD MEMBERS NEED DEPTH OF INFORMATION.
THEY'RE NOT REALLY FAMILIAR WITH THIS MARKET.
AND I WANT TO SEE THEM DIVE DEEP AND I WANNA SEE THE ERCOT STAFF WHO BRIEF AND PREPARE THEM, ASSIST THEM IN DIVING DEEP.
AND, AND THIS ISN'T STRIKING ME AS THAT TYPE OF DEEP ELEMENT.
IT MAY HAVE SOME VALUE IN GIVING US A QUICK RUNDOWN OF WHERE WE SEE THESE THINGS IN COMPARISON, LIKE THE FIVE ISSUES THAT ARE THERE THAT ARE ALL KIND OF SUBSTITUTES AND COMPLIMENTS ON, UH, ON BIG MARKET DESIGN PICTURES.
BUT I'M, I'M TELLING YOU, I'M STILL STRUGGLING WITH THE ADDED BENEFIT WE'RE GETTING FROM THIS IF WE'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO THE EXTENSIVE RECORD THAT HAS DEVELOPED IN THIS PROCESS.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE INFORMATION IS THAT THE DECISION MAKERS NEED TO KNOW TO MAKE A DECISION.
AND IF THEY'RE NOT DEEP IN THE RECORD, WE'RE NOT GETTING COMPLETE
[00:55:01]
DECISIONS.[7. Outline Next Steps]
HERE IS, IS KIND OF NEXT STEPS.AND, AND I THINK ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I LIKE TO, LIKE, TO THINK ABOUT IS, IS, IS TO, THE BEST WAY TO USE SOME BEST WAY TO WORK ON SOMETHING IS TO USE IT.
AND I THINK THE NICE THING IS WE, WE ALREADY ARE USING IT.
AND THAT WAS THE THE POINT THAT I MADE EARLIER.
WE HAVE BEEN HAVING DISCUSSIONS WITH THIS STUFF, UH, AND UN EVEN MAYBE UNINTENTIONALLY, UM, KATIE AND NED WERE USING IT IN THEIR PRESENTATION.
SO WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THAT IT'S, IT'S ALREADY, IT'S ALREADY BEING USED.
UM, AND, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS NEXT STEPS IS, IS TO CONTINUE TO CONTINUE TO USE THAT AND, AND AS A FEEDBACK IS TO SAY, WELL, IS THIS HELPFUL TO THE, THE, THE BOARD? IS THIS HELPFUL FOR, FOR DECISION MAKERS? WHAT CAN WE DO TO, TO MODIFY THE PROCESS? BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE NEED TO START SOMEWHERE.
AND WE HAVE HAD INITIAL DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD, OBVIOUSLY IN AUGUST.
UM, WE CAN UPDATE THE BOARD ON OUR PROGRESS WITH THEM, UM, WITH STAFF, COMMISSION STAFF, COMMISSIONERS FOLLOW UP.
I, I, I DON'T SORT OF SEE THIS AS SOMETHING THAT'S SET IT AND FORGET IT.
UM, WE WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, WORK, WORK WITH THIS FRAMEWORK AND, AND SEE IF, IF THERE'S ANY, HEY, DO WE NEED TO ADD SOMETHING, SUBTRACT SOMETHING.
I DON'T SEE THIS AS SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA ULTIMATELY BE SOMETHING WHERE, UM, ALL OF IT'S GONNA CHANGE, BUT IT MIGHT CHANGE ON THE EDGE DEPENDING ON WHAT WE, WE LEARN IN THE PROCESS.
YOU KNOW, PARTICULARLY WITH THE MEASUREMENT APPROACHES AND, AND ULTIMATELY USE THE FRAMEWORK.
AND, AND, AND I DO LIKE THE IDEAS OF SAYING, WELL, HEY, IF WE'RE GONNA USE IT, LET'S, LET'S USE IT.
AND, AND I THINK ULTIMATELY WHEN WE START THINKING ABOUT WHERE ARE THE, THE GAPS AND, AND THE CONSIDERATIONS WHERE WE NEED TO GO, I THINK IT'S GONNA HELP US SEE THAT AND, AND ULTIMATELY PRIORITIZE SOME, SOME ITEMS THAT, THAT WE MIGHT NEED TO MOVE, MOVE AROUND A LITTLE BIT.
UM, ESPECIALLY AS WE'RE TRYING TO APPLY SCARCE RESOURCES IN THE PROCESS.
CAN, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? YES, MICHELLE.
SO I THINK WHAT SEEMS TO BE MISSING, AND MAYBE I, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S BEING ARTICULATED WELL OR NOT, AND I MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO.
UM, IT SEEMS LIKE WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT PROCESSES, BUT I THINK THE BIGGER ISSUE IS WHAT IS THE ULTIMATE GOAL WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE FOR.
WE'VE GOT ALL THESE DIFFERENT THINGS.
WE DON'T KNOW HOW THEY FIT TOGETHER.
WE HAVE A RELIABILITY STANDARD THAT WAS ADOPTED MM-HMM
BUT NO ONE SEEMS TO KNOW IS THAT DO WE HAVE TO ACHIEVE IT? IF WE DON'T ACHIEVE IT, WHAT HAPPENS? IS IT A WOW, THAT SOUNDS NICE, BUT IF WE DON'T GET THERE, COOL, THAT'S FINE TOO.
UM, AND, AND I THINK THE OTHER PART OF THAT TOO IS HOW ARE WE GOING TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL? IS IT WE HAVE TO DO IT ANY WHICH WAY WE CAN? AND IF THAT'S THROUGH THE MARKET, GREAT.
BUT IF IT'S NOT THROUGH THE MARKET.
OR WHAT, BECAUSE I THINK THESE ARE ALL MARKET MARKET DESIGN CONCEPTS THAT HAVE TO WORK WITHIN A COMPETITIVE MARKET.
BUT THEN AT THE SAME TIME, IF THEY DON'T ACHIEVE THE GOAL, THAT I THINK IS REALLY NOT CLEAR TO EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM.
UM, IT'S CERTAINLY NOT TO OUR MEMBERS THEN, YOU KNOW, IS IT FINE TO JUST DO IT THROUGH OUT OF MARKET ACTIONS AND EVERYBODY'S GONNA GO ON THEIR WAY AND BE GOOD WITH THAT? OR IS, IS IT THAT WE ARE INTENDING TO MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER IT IS THAT WE HAVE USES A COMPETITIVE MARKET TO ACHIEVE THE POLICY OBJECTIVES THAT ARE LAID OUT BEFORE US THAT ARE ABOUT AS CLEAR AS MUD TODAY.
UM, AND I, I THINK THAT MAY BE WHERE EVERYBODY'S A LITTLE CONFUSED.
'CAUSE WE CAN TALK ABOUT ALL THE DIFFERENT PROCESSES, BUT IF WE DON'T KNOW THE GOAL THAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO SOLVE FOR, AND WE DON'T KNOW, IS THAT A GOAL THAT HAS TO BE ACHIEVED THROUGH THIS MARKET OR THAT, OR, OR NOT THROUGH THAT MARKET, THAT TAKES A VERY DIFFERENT TENOR.
UM, AND I THINK VOTES END UP BEING, YOU KNOW, VERY DIFFERENT.
AND SO I GUESS THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M STILL CONFUSED.
WELL, I THINK, I THINK IF WE, AND I THINK IT DOES GET TO, TO BRIAN MAYBE BRIAN'S QUESTION A LITTLE BIT.
UM, IF, IF THERE WAS THAT DIRECTION THAT ULTIMATELY CAME FROM ABOVE, WHETHER IT'S THE LEGISLATURE
[01:00:01]
OR THE REGULATORS, THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL.I I DON'T THINK THEY'VE ARTICULATED THAT COM IN, IN A COMPLETE WAY.
I THINK WE HAVE PIECES OF IT, RIGHT? THEY, THEY'VE GIVEN US PIECES, AND I THINK WHAT THIS DOES IS HELP SHOW THEM HOW THOSE PIECES CAN, COULD FIT TOGETHER, RIGHT? BUT DO WE MAYBE NEED TO, INSTEAD OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW THIS COULD HAPPEN, MAYBE WE NEED TO SAY WE DON'T HAVE CLEAR DIRECTION FROM YOU AND WE NEED A BETTER DIRECTION.
I MEAN, YOU'VE SAID THIS AND THIS, BUT WE STILL ARE UNSURE AS TO HOW THAT FITS TOGETHER.
AND WE'RE BEING ASKED TO MAKE POLICY DECISIONS OR IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS WITHOUT THE FULL OBJECTIVE ARTICULATED.
SO LET'S GO BACK AND, AND, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU HOLD, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT HOLD FEET TO THE FIRE IS THE RIGHT TERM, BUT BASICALLY SAY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU, WE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH THE GOAL MM-HMM
BUT WE NEED A BETTER DIRECTION OF WHAT THAT ACTUAL GOAL IS.
AND SO CAN YOU PLEASE DELINEATE THAT FOR US? ARE YOU FINE WITH THIS HAPPENING THROUGH, OUT OF MARKET ACTIONS OR ARE YOU NOT FINE WITH THAT? ARE YOU, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, SO THAT WE CAN DO THAT BECAUSE WE KEEP COMING AT THIS FROM A PIECEMEAL STANDPOINT, AND I KNOW THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM.
UM, AND I THINK WE ARE TOO, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT WE ARE DOING THAT IN THIS, I GUESS IS, IS MY CONCERN BECAUSE WE STILL DON'T, I MEAN, IT'S THAT YOU'VE TAKEN THIS OFF THE TABLE AND YOU'VE SAID THIS IS, YOU KNOW, WELL, YEAH, WE'LL MOVE FORWARD ON THIS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY DIRECTION OVER HERE.
I MUST FEEL LIKE WE'RE CONTINUING TO PUT THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE.
WELL, I, I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.
UH, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE GONNA SOLVE THAT TODAY.
I, AND I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THAT.
I THINK THOUGH THAT'S WHERE THE, SOME OF THE CONFUSION COMES FROM AND WHY THERE'S THIS, I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
YOU KNOW, I, AND I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACTUALLY PULL IT ALL TOGETHER.
I, I THINK WE'RE JUST MISSING A BIG PIECE THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY, THIS IS HOW IT'S GOTTA BE IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT ALL WORK AGAIN.
UH, SHANE THOMAS, SHE, UM, YEAH, I THINK IT'S GONNA COME DOWN A LOT TO HOW THIS IS, UM, BEING USED IN THE WEIGHT THAT'S GIVEN TO IT AND, YOU KNOW, THE FORWARD PROCESSES.
AND THERE'S CERTAINLY OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS TO HAVE SOME SORT OF VALUE IN POINTING PEOPLE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION OF WHAT'S IMPORTANT.
UM, THE ISSUES ARE THAT THERE IS A LOT OF, UM, YOU KNOW, SUBJECTIVITY OBVIOUSLY IN, IN MANY OF THESE, UH, MEASUREMENTS.
UM, AND I, AND A LOT OF THE TIMES THERE ARE PLUSES AND MINUS IN EACH CATEGORY, DEPENDING ON YOUR PERSPECTIVE.
AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THERE'S A WAY TO, WHEN YOU'VE GOT YOUR LIST OF YOUR TABLE, MAYBE SOMETIMES THERE'S A RED AND GREEN IN THE SAME COLUMN, YOU KNOW, TO SHOW THAT THERE ARE, AS A MORE COMPLEXITY, THERE IS MORE COMPLEXITY AROUND THIS.
AND WE CAN ALLOW, UH, PEOPLE TO MAKE THOSE POINTS, UM, MORE ELABORATELY, UM, BEFORE THE, IN THE PRESENTATION OR THE MATERIAL THAT'S PRESENTED TO THE, THE BOARD OR WHEREVER.
UM, SAY FOR SOME THINGS LIKE LOOKING AT DRRS AND EFFICIENCY, UM, THAT'S STILL UP IN THE AIR DEPENDING ON HOW IT'S INTEGRATED, RIGHT? AND THERE'S SOME WAYS TO SAY THAT, WELL, IF IT'S CO OPTIMIZED AT ALL AND IS ALLOWED TO AFFECT PRICES, UM, THEN THAT WOULD BE OF REALLY NEGATIVE TOWARDS EFFICIENCY.
BUT IF THAT'S DONE IN A WAY WHERE IT ALLOWS, YOU KNOW, THE PRICES TO FORM, UH, MORE ACCURATELY, UM, THEN ACTUALLY IT WAS A BIG BL BIG PLUS TO EFFICIENCY.
SO LIKE THE, IT'S NOT SO CUT AND DRY FOR, FOR A LOT OF THESE ISSUES.
AND WHEN YOU BOIL IT DOWN TOO SUCCINCTLY, YOU, YOU, YOU LOSE A LOT OF THAT.
AND THAT'S THE ONLY THE THING THAT MAKES ME WE OF THIS PROCESS.
SO, UM, BUT THERE'S A WAY FOR THIS.
LIKE THESE ALL ARE IMPORTANT FACTORS AND THEN THE ABILITY TO POINT THE RIGHT PEOPLE TO THE RIGHT FACTORS IS VALUABLE.
WELL, I, I THINK EVEN JUST YOUR, YOUR COMMENTS RIGHT NOW ARE REALLY HELPFUL IN TERMS OF USING A COMMON LANGUAGE TO DESCRIBE A VIEWPOINT, RIGHT? YOU SAID, WELL, YOU COULD THINK OF EFFICIENCY THIS WAY
[01:05:01]
AND DESCRIBE HOW IT COULD BE DESIGNED OR THINK OF IT THIS WAY AND, AND IT WAS DIFFERENT.SO TO ME THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF THE FRAMEWORK IN USE.
NO, I MEAN, YOU, YOU USING THAT TO MAKE YOUR, YOUR DIFFERENT POINTS AND, AND I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S THE SUCCESS, UH, OF, OF, OF APPLICATION OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND, AND THINKING ABOUT HOW, HOW THIS, YOU KNOW, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN AND IS THAT A GOOD THING OR IS THAT A BAD THING? AND IF YOU THINK OF IT THIS WAY OR YOU THINK OF IT THAT WAY, THAT'S, THAT'S GREAT.
YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE TRYING TO GIVE, YOU KNOW, EVERY N-P-R-R-A-A GRADE
SO IT'S, DO WE NEED TO GRADE A, LIKE, GO THROUGH A MORE ELABORATE PROCESS FOR NRR THAT ARE CLEAN UP OR JUST AFFECT LIKE A REGISTRATION PROCESS OR, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, MAYBE NOT, YOU KNOW, A CLEANUP ITEM IS MAYBE THAT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S AN EFFICIENCY THING.
WE'RE CLEANING UP AN INEFFICIENT FORMULA OR SOMETHING.
YOU DON'T NEED TO CHECK EVERY OTHER BOX, RIGHT? IT'S JUST, IT'S CLEANUP EFFICIENCY OR, OR WHATEVER IT IS.
AND SO, AGAIN, I, I DON'T WANNA OVER-PRESCRIBE AND, AND I THINK LIKE ANYTHING THAT MIGHT BE NEW, YOU, YOU KIND OF CRAWL A LITTLE BIT AND THEN YOU, YOU KNOW, BOTTLE AND THEN YOU CAN RUN.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'LL, WE'LL USE IT AND, YOU KNOW, SEE WHERE IT GOES AND TWEAK IF NECESSARY.
AND IAN, SO ONE THOUGHT I HAVE ON THIS, KEITH, IS THERE ARE ITEMS, UM, THAT WE ARE WORKING ON THAT WITH MY BACKGROUND OF WORKING ON THE GENERATION SIDE, I THINK ARE OUR EFFICIENCY BATTLES THAT WILL BE, THAT ARE IN THE SHORT TERM, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO SAY THIS IN THE SHORT TERM, YES, THEY ARE EFFICIENT IN THE LONG TERM.
UM, UH, RTCS THE EASIEST ONE TO EXPLAIN THIS IN.
UM, YES, BY RECONFIGURING THE MARKET EVERY FIVE MINUTES, YOU DEFINITELY CREATE A MORE, UM, RESILIENT GRID.
IN THE LONG TERM, YOU'VE STRIPPED A BILLION DOLLARS OUT OF RESOURCE ADEQUACY CONCERNS.
UM, YOU'VE ALSO TOLD, UH, PEOPLE WHO MAKE 30 TO 50 YEAR INVESTMENT HORIZONS THAT YOU MAY PULL THE RUG OUT FROM UNDER THEM AGAIN AT ANOTHER TIME.
UH, SO THERE, THERE ARE, THERE'S SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM THOUGHTS ON ALL THIS.
SO I, I'M WONDERING IF, I'M ALMOST THINKING LIKE, THIS IS 2D AND IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, YOU NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE IT 3D, UM, WITH ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE IN THERE.
UM, I ALSO, UM, JUST A THOUGHT ON THIS, BUT ALL OF THESE ALMOST SPEAK TO POSITIVES.
UM, I DO THINK THERE ARE SOME THAT, SOME THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO PUT THROUGH HERE THAT HAD NEGATIVE TRADE OFF AND WE NEED TO, UM, BE HONEST AND PUT THAT IN THERE AS WELL.
SO WE NEED A WAY TO, UM, SAY THAT IN THESE, NOW MAYBE YOUR THOUGHT ON THAT IS THE, THE MINUSES IN THESE COLUMNS.
UM, BUT I THINK, I THINK WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THAT TOO.
IF WE'RE GONNA BE, UM, USING THIS AS A FRAMEWORK TO DESCRIBE EVERYTHING WE'RE WORKING ON, EVERYTHING LARGE WE'RE WORKING ON.
AND, AND AGAIN, THE, THE MINUS WAS A WAY OF SHOWING THAT IT'S, IT'S NOT ALL PLUS, RIGHT? UM, THAT THERE ARE, THERE HAVE TO BE TRADE-OFFS AND AS, AS DECISION MAKERS.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE DIFFICULT THING, RIGHT? IS THAT KNOW IF, IF IT WERE ALL PLUS AND ALL EASY, LET'S JUST HAND OUT CANDY.
RIGHT? YOU KNOW, WE CAN DO THAT, BUT WE KNOW IF WE ALL EAT CANDY, YOU KNOW, THEN THAT'S GONNA HELP THE WAISTLINE AND YEAH.
YOU KNOW, OUR HEALTH AND OTHER THINGS.
WE, WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THOSE TRADE OFFS AND, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WE, WE CAN SHAPE THIS TO DO THAT, THAT'S WHAT IT'S THERE FOR.
UM, AND ALSO GOING BACK TO YOUR CRAWL, WALK, RUN, UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT ERCOT TAKES SHORT AND LONG-TERM VIEWS ON THIS.
UM, I'VE, I'VE HEARD YOU SAY THIS CAN BE USED FOR A FEW DIFFERENT THINGS.
DESCRIBING IT TO DECISION MAKERS MM-HMM
UH, FOR PRIORITIZING PROJECTS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, I THINK ERCOT SHOULD IDENTIFY WHAT ITS SHORT-TERM GOALS ARE, AND THEN TALK ABOUT HOW THESE COULD BE LONG-TERM GOALS THAT THESE TEND TO SEEM, IF WE SEE BENEFITS WITH USING THIS FRAMEWORK.
UM, BECAUSE WHEN YOU MENTION THINGS LIKE USING THIS FOR PROJECT PRIORITIZATION MM-HMM
I IMMEDIATELY THINK OF THOSE DEAD NPRS OUT THERE ARE, BECAUSE ERCOT DECIDED AGAINST WHAT THE STAKEHOLDER BODY HAD DECIDED TO DO WITH A PRIORITIZATION.
[01:10:01]
SO IS THIS A WAY FOR ERCOT TO SAY ALMOST, YOU KNOW, CUT THE DECK AND SAY, NO, THIS NEEDS TO GO INTO HERE BECAUSE WE HAVE USED THIS FRAMEWORK TO SAY IT'S MORE IMPORTANT THAN THESE OTHER THINGS.UM, SO I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND ERCOT HAS A LIMITED, UM, SET OF STAFF LIMITS, SET OF BUDGET, BUT MAYBE, MAYBE FOR THAT, THAT IS BETTER SUITED TO WORK WITH TROY IN A BETTER WAY TO FIGURE THAT OUT AND FIGURE OUT DO WE NEED TO PUT IN A BIGGER BUFFER FOR WHEN THINGS COME UP? DO WE NEED TO PUT IN A BIGGER BUFFER SO ERCOT CAN BETTER PLAY CATCH UP WITH THE THINGS THAT ARE IN, ARE BACKDATED THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, AND, AND SOLVE ONE PROBLEM DIRECTLY AT A TIME.
I THINK THE, THE DISCUSSION ON PRIORITIZATION, MY SENSE IS THAT'S GONNA, I THINK THAT'S BIGGER THAN JUST WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
UM, AND AGAIN, NOT TO DELVE TOO DEEP INTO THAT, UM, IS, UH, AND SO THIS IS KEITH COLLINS.
I SEE THE, THE COMMENT KEITH COLLINS
AND AS I'M LOOKING AT RESOURCE ALLOCATION AND WHAT WE HAVE IN TERMS OF YEAH.
AND, AND SOME OF THESE INITIATIVES, IF THERE'S NO STAFF IMPACT, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T, AND THAT'S ONE THING, BUT I THINK WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THERE'S, WE'RE SPENDING A LOT OF TIME ON, ON CERTAIN INITIATIVES THAT DON'T, YOU KNOW, THERE MAY BE A PARTICULAR PARTY THAT'S INTERESTED, UM, AND, AND THINKING ABOUT HOW YOU PRIORITIZE THAT BEFORE YOU GET TO THE TROY PROCESS, RIGHT? IT'S LIKE, WOW, WE'RE GONNA SPEND A LOT OF TIME WORKING ON THAT, YOU AND US, AND MAYBE THERE'S A STAKEHOLDER THAT'S REALLY INTERESTED IN THAT, BUT MAYBE EVEN COLLECTIVELY YOU DON'T THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.
I DON'T KNOW IS HISTORICALLY THOUGH, HOW WE'VE DEALT WITH THAT IS ASKING THAT STAKEHOLDER TO FILE AN MPRR.
AND THAT UNFORTUNATELY REQUIRES ERCOT STAFF IN MANY CASES WHERE WE'VE HELPED PEOPLE CREATE AND CRAFT EFFECTIVE NPR R THAT HAVE THAT, THAT ADDRESS ONE PERSON'S CONCERN RIGHT.
AND ARE NOT A PRIORITY FOR OUR STAFF EITHER.
THEN I, I WOULD COUNTER AND SAY THE BETTER, THE MORE DIRECT WAY TO HANDLE THAT IS FOR ERCOT STAFF TO NOT TAKE ON THOSE.
UM, IN MY PREVIOUS ROLE, THERE WERE TIMES WHERE ERCOT STAFF WAS WILLING TO WORK WITH ME ON NPRS AND NOT WILLING TO WORK WITH ME ON NPRS.
AND MAYBE WE NEED TO GET BACK TO THAT TIME PERIOD WHERE, AND ERCOT CAN SAY NO, AND I CAN, I CAN SAY KEITH IS HAPPY TO PRIORITIZE PRIOR PROJECTS THAT KEITH WANTS DONE THROUGH THAT PROCESS.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT WE HISTORICALLY HAD.
WAS ERCOT DID THEIR NPR R STAKEHOLDERS DID THEIRS, BROUGHT THEM, AND THEN MARKET RULES HELPED MAKE SURE THEY WERE CORRECT.
YOU KNOW, COREY AND TEAM HELPED US MAKE SURE LANGUAGE WAS NOT INCORRECT, THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT IT, UNLESS ERCOT WAS BOUGHT IN ON THE PROCESS, UM, THERE WERE MANY NPRS THAT ERCOT SAID, NO, WE'RE NOT GONNA HELP YOU AT ALL.
WHEN I WAS WITH LUMINA, AND THERE WERE OTHER ONES THAT ERCOT SAID, WE LOVE THIS IDEA.
HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT THIS WAY? HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT THIS? WE RECOMMEND THIS, BUT I THINK I, I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD BE DOING EVERYONE'S HOMEWORK AND, AND NEITHER DO I I THINK THAT, AND, AND AGAIN, AS WE REVISIT, REVISIT HOW WE PRIORITIZE THING, THEN, THEN SURE.
KEITH, KEITH CAN BE REALLY GOOD AT THAT.
UM, IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON, WHAT WE'RE NOT, UM, IS THAT THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY? I DON'T KNOW.
AND IF IT'S A WAY THAT'S WORKED IN THE PAST, MAYBE, UM, WE'LL SEE.
BUT, BUT I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER DISCUSSION.
THAT'S, THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY THIS, BUT, BUT I THINK FROM, FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, YOU MIGHT SAY, WELL, KEITH, IN THE, IN THE SUITE OF INITIATIVES YOU'RE GONNA WORK ON, RIGHT? I MIGHT LOOK AT THIS AND SAY, WELL, GEEZ, WHERE'S MY PRIORITY? RIGHT.
AND THEN SAY, I'M GONNA FOCUS ON THOSE.
SO I GUESS WHAT I'M, I GUESS PART OF THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE IS I THINK THERE ARE DIRECT WAYS TO HELP YOU GET THESE OUTCOMES THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THAT ARE LESS ALL ENCOMPASSING THAN WHAT WE ARE SEEING THIS TO BE.
AND MAYBE WE'RE SEEING IT INCORRECTLY.
UM, AND, AND MAYBE WE NEED TO TAKE THAT OFFLINE AND HAVE, HAVE, HAVE THIS DISCUSSION OFFLINE.
BUT, UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN OUR MIND THERE'S AN ELEMENT HERE.
UM, RICHARD, DID I SEE YOU WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT? NO.
THERE'S A, UM, I MEAN, OH, REMEMBER TO STATE YOUR NAME, I THINK, UH, SHANE THOMAS SHELL.
THE, UM, THERE IS SOME, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THIS IS ALL POINTING TO THAT THERE'S SOME EFFICIENCIES TO BE HAD IN THE WAY THAT WE PRIORITIZE AND, YOU
[01:15:01]
KNOW, UH, AND LINE UP ALL THE DIFFERENT REVISION REQUESTS THAT ARE COMING THROUGH.I MEAN, IT'S KIND OF, I MEAN, IT'S A BIT, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO KIND OF REEVALUATE THINGS.
YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU SET THE EYE ATTACK.
WE, THEY, NPRS, THEY, WE SET THE, YOU KNOW, TARGET DATE AT ONE POINT, AND THEN THE SYSTEM CHANGES.
AND THERE'S NO REAL WAY TO REEVALUATE WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S STILL IMPORTANT.
WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S, UM, NEW, SOMETHING ELSE HAS COME OUT THAT'S BETTER, ANOTHER THAT'S GONNA LEVERATE THIS ISSUE.
OR IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S A HIGHER PRIORITY ITEM, SOMETIMES THAT'S VERY, AND SINCE YURI, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF THINGS COMING THROUGH ON FIRE, IT SEEMS, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S MADE IT VERY DIFFICULT IN THIS PROCESS, UM, WHERE A LOT OF THINGS ARE HAVING TO JUMP THE QUEUE AND FOR GOOD REASON.
UH, AND SOMETIMES MAYBE NOT SO GOOD REASONS, BUT THEY'RE ALL, THEY'RE ALL KIND OF GETTING PUT THROUGH.
UM, SO MAYBE THERE'S SOME, UH, OTHER WAY TO THINK ABOUT, UM, THAT PROCESS MM-HMM
THAT, UH, MAKE IT MORE VALUABLE.
AND IN OTHER WAYS, THE STAKEHOLDERS, WE ARE SETTING THE PRIORITIES, YOU KNOW, COLLECTIVELY AS WE SEE THEM AS THE, AND THEY'RE COMING THROUGH MM-HMM
UM, AND THAT SHOULD HAVE SOME MERIT TO IT.
YOU KNOW, WE ARE WEIGHING IN WHEN WE WE'RE SETTING THESE PRIORITIES, BUT THERE'S NOT REALLY A GOOD WAY TO RESHUFFLE YEAH.
OR, UM, SET A HIGH PRIORITY PROJECT, THE KIDS TO JUMP THE QUEUE OR THINGS LIKE THAT.
NO, I, I, ANYWAY, I APPRECIATE COMMENTS.
MARK, COULD YOU GO BACK TO SLIDE THREE? THREE? SURE.
YOU KNOW, IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I'M STRUGGLING WITH, AND I THINK I'M HEARING IT AROUND THE ROOM, UM, FRAMEWORK PURPOSE, PRIMARY PURPOSE.
I'M STILL NOT CLEAR WHAT THAT IS.
AND, YOU KNOW, PROVIDE DECISION MAKERS, WHICH DECISION MAKERS IN WHAT CONTEXT, ON WHAT ISSUES.
AND I THINK IF YOU COULD HELP US NOT, I DON'T MEAN TODAY, SURE.
BUT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS, IF YOU COULD HELP US ALL UNDERSTAND WHEN, WHY, HOW, WHERE THIS WOULD BE USED, WE COULD REALLY FOCUS THIS DISCUSSION.
'CAUSE I THINK WE'RE ALL IMAGINING DIFFERENT SCENARIOS AND DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THIS IS APPLIED.
YOU KNOW, ME, YOU KNOW, WHAT MY BIAS IS, IS WE BRING ISSUES TO THE ERCOT BOARD AND THEY MAKE DECISIONS ON THESE, THESE GRIPPY ISSUES.
AND, AND I'M NOT SURE IF THAT IS THE SCOPE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, OR IF THE SCOPE IS NARROW OR BROADER.
SO I, I THINK THAT WOULD REALLY INFORM OUR DIALOGUE GOING FORWARD.
ANY FINAL COMMENTS HERE? LOOKING AT THE CROWD.
WELL THANK YOU ALL FOR, UM, STAYING.
IT'S JUST AT, JUST BEFORE FOUR, UH, CENTRAL TIME.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR, FOR BEING HERE.
THIS WAS A CONSTRUCTIVE CONVERSATION.
AND, UM, I THINK, UH, UH, WE'VE TAKEN SOME NOTES ON, ON SOME OF THE DIALOGUE HERE AND, AND LOOK FORWARD TO, UH, WORKING FORWARD WITH YOU.
HAVE YOURSELF A GREAT AFTERNOON.